Empathetic Factors and Influences on Physical Performance: A Topical Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance is dependent upon both physical and psychological factors. As a social animal, human behaviors are influenced by interactions with others. Empathy is based on social interactions and is defined as the understanding, awareness of, sensitivity to, and ability to vicariously experience the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another. There are few investigations on the influence of empathy in relation to individual and team performance and activity. There is some initial research suggesting that observing sad photos or videos or fatiguing exercise can adversely affect subsequent performance. Possible mechanisms may be attributed to mirror neurons or the affordance competition hypothesis. The relative degree of empathetic influences can be modulated by sex, age, personal familiarity, cultures and other factors. With the limited research in sport and exercise science, there is a need for more research to investigate the role of empathy on individual and team performances. The objective of this topical review was to examine the possible effects of empathy on physical performance, the potential underlying mechanisms and influencing variables moderating the association between empathy and performance?
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".